UPDATE: FWICE on Wednesday withdrew its non-cooperation directive against Ranveer Singh with immediate effect, after the actor sent the federation a legal notice challenging the directive. FWICE president B.N. Tiwari said the decision was taken following intervention by IMPPA, the Producers Guild of India and CINTAA. “We have been told that we should all sit together with the producers’ body and take an appropriate decision where neither the producers and directors nor the actor face any issues,” Tiwari said. “No one has won or lost in this matter,” he added. The underlying financial dispute between Singh and Excel Entertainment remains unresolved.

PREVIOUSLY: When top actor Ranveer Singh walked away from “Don 3” in December 2025, he triggered what has become one of Bollywood’s most closely watched industry disputes in years – a conflict that has drawn in around 25 of the film business’s most senior figures, produced a Big Four audit, wound through the Producers Guild of India and landed, ultimately, with a non-cooperation directive from the Federation of Western India Cine Employees. Now, for the first time, people with direct knowledge of the private mediation proceedings are giving a detailed account of what was said in those rooms.

The dispute between Singh and Excel Entertainment – the production company of filmmaker Farhan Akhtar and producer Ritesh Sidhwani – centers on a damages claim of approximately INR45 crore ($4.7 million) and competing accounts of why a collaboration announced with considerable fanfare in August 2023 collapsed three weeks before cameras were due to roll. The timeline, as described by people with direct knowledge of the proceedings, offers a more detailed picture than either side’s public account. Excel shot a first look at its own expense on April 19, 2023, and released the footage publicly on Aug. 9, 2023, with Singh sharing it on his own social media. Yet the formal term sheet recording the principal terms of his engagement was not signed until Aug. 7, 2024, more than a year after he had been publicly presented as the new Don, with the long-form agreement still being negotiated between the two parties thereafter.

Created by Salim Khan and Javed Akhtar, “Don” (1978), directed by Chandra Barot, starred Amitabh Bachchan in dual roles – that of a ruthless mafia don and his lookalike Vijay, a slum-dweller who is brought in by the police to masquerade as the gang leader after his death. The film was one of the biggest hits of the year. In 2006, Farhan Akhtar, Javed Akhtar’s son, rebooted the franchise with Shah Rukh Khan in the lead playing the dual roles of Don and Vijay in “Don: The Chase Begins Again.” The film was a smash hit and a 2011 sequel “Don 2” followed, which was showcased at the Berlin Film Festival and featured Hrithik Roshan, another top Bollywood star, in a special appearance.

The sequence of events in the lead-up to Singh’s exit matters because it frames what followed. On March 25, 2025, Excel sent Singh’s manager the latest draft of the script. On August 25, 2025, the production shared a schedule covering action training, costume trials and a principal photography window running from Jan. 9 to the end of July 2026. Singh completed a round of action training between Nov. 3 and 12, 2025, the costs for which Excel covered. Action rehearsal dates on Nov. 17, 18, 23 and 24 were subsequently canceled by Singh’s side; he attended a costume trial on Nov. 27. On Dec. 2 – the day “Dhurandhar” opened in cinemas — his team notified the production he would be unavailable for rehearsals on Dec. 11 and 12. The spy thriller, directed by Aditya Dhar and starring Singh in the lead role, would go on to become the fifth highest-grossing Indian film of all time; its sequel, “Dhurandhar: The Revenge,” released in March 2026, surpassed that to rank second all-time.

On Dec. 15 and 16, Singh participated in script readings with Akhtar and the key cast; multiple sources say a behind-the-scenes video exists of him expressing strong enthusiasm for the project. A look test scheduled for Dec. 17 was cancelled at the last minute. On Dec. 20, Singh communicated to the producers by phone that he was exiting the film. By that date, “Dhurandhar” had crossed INR500 crore (around $52.5 million) at the domestic box office.

The mediation process that followed unfolded across multiple rounds. Earlier sessions, which Singh did not attend, brought together around 25 senior industry figures including Salman Khan, one of India’s biggest stars, at the first meeting, and Hrithik Roshan, the “War” and “Krrish” franchise star, filmmaker-producer Karan Johar, and actor Alia Bhatt at subsequent gatherings, all convened after Excel filed a formal complaint with the Producers Guild of India – the film industry’s primary trade body for producers. A later joint session, at which both Singh and Excel’s representatives were present, was attended by a smaller group including Aamir Khan, one of Bollywood’s most prominent actor-producers; actor Anil Kapoor; filmmakers Rohit Shetty, Rajkumar Hirani and Ashutosh Gowariker; producer Sidharth Roy Kapur; and Viacom18 studio head Ajit Andhare. The sessions were deliberately kept outside the guild’s formal process so that all parties could speak without committing to official positions.

Singh attended the joint session. He came, sources say, with several pages of handwritten notes and spoke for roughly 90 minutes. His account centered on four grievances: that the script had never reached a standard he was comfortable with; that Akhtar had been unavailable for sustained creative collaboration over the preceding years, citing cancelled meetings and the director’s commitments to concert touring and an acting project; that his fee had been renegotiated downward during the process; and that the film’s budget had been reduced significantly from an originally discussed figure of around INR300–350 crore (around $31.5–$36.7 million) to approximately INR150 crore (around $15.7 million) – a scale he felt was inadequate for the franchise. According to people present at the meeting, Singh also said he had not received any signing advance. Separately, people close to Singh have alleged publicly that Excel explored replacing him with Hrithik Roshan before returning to him in the wake of “Dhurandhar”‘s performance. Roshan subsequently issued a public statement saying he had never been approached for the role at any stage.

When Akhtar and Sidhwani were called in to respond, they arrived with printed records of their WhatsApp correspondence with Singh spanning several years. Those records, reviewed by the assembled group, showed Singh reacting positively – sources describe the messages as enthusiastic – to successive drafts of the script as they were shared. The documented exchange undercut his claim, according to multiple people in the room, that the script had never met his expectations. On the fee renegotiation allegation, Sidhwani’s position, as relayed by sources, was that no one from Excel had formally reopened or reduced the contracted terms — that earlier discussions had formed part of pre-contract negotiations, not alterations after the term sheet was signed. The budget reduction and director availability claims were similarly contested. Sources say the room’s assessment after the full session was that the documentary evidence had largely answered Singh’s allegations.

At one point during those proceedings, sources say, Sidhwani asked Singh directly whether he would have exited the project had “Dhurandhar” not been a hit. Singh, according to people present, said he would not have.

On the financial question, a Big Four accounting firm – described by sources as having no existing relationship with either party – was engaged to audit Excel’s pre-production expenditure. That audit returned a figure of approximately INR45 crore ($4.7 million), covering four overseas recce trips, writing costs including changes requested by or agreed with Singh, adjustments to cast and crew, and contractual obligations to more than 200 workers whose arrangements had been locked ahead of the January shoot. Variety was unable to independently verify the figure. Sidhwani has reportedly made his full accounts available for review from the outset of the dispute.

Following those meetings, Singh put forward a settlement proposal: INR10 crore ($1 million) in immediate compensation and a discount of 25% on his fee for any future Excel project. Sources say the producers rejected the offer, their position being that a discount on a future collaboration they no longer wished to pursue held no value, and that they were seeking straightforward cash compensation for the losses incurred.

Communication then effectively ceased. Sources say Singh traveled to the U.S. after discussions broke down, and that Excel’s subsequent attempts to reach his team went unanswered. The story of his exit leaked before the two sides could agree on a joint statement. The complaint was then escalated from the Indian Film & Television Directors’ Association (IFTDA) – under whose umbrella the matter first formally landed – to FWICE, which on May 25 issued a non-cooperation directive after Singh’s team did not respond to three separate notices. FWICE chief advisor Ashoke Pandit has clarified that the action is not a legal ban – the federation, as a trade body rather than a judicial authority, cannot enforce such a restriction – but constitutes a directive to its members across 30 affiliated crafts instructing them not to work on productions involving Singh until the dispute is resolved.

The legal dimension of the dispute sharpened further on June 1 this year, when veteran producer T.P. Aggarwal – a former president of the Indian Motion Picture Producers’ Association (IMPPA) and four-time president of the Film Federation of India – filed a petition in the Bombay Civil Court against FWICE and IMPPA. Aggarwal contended that neither body has the authority to issue a non-cooperation directive against any individual in the industry, citing a 2017 Competition Commission ruling to that effect. “Whatever FWICE has done is completely wrong and it’s not within their jurisdiction,” Aggarwal said. “It’s not something they can do.”

The directive also drew a public response from the Cine and TV Artistes’ Association (CINTAA), of which Singh is a member. “CINTAA is proud to have Ranveer Singh as our member,” CINTAA VP Padmini Kolhapure said. “We stand by him and for him whenever he needs us. We are here for him, with him.” CINTAA president Poonam Dhillon, speaking to Variety India, said the association had not been approached by any of the parties and expressed regret that it had not been given the opportunity to mediate. “It’s a very strange situation to be in because it’s one of our members, but neither the artist nor the producer or the Federation informed us or took us into confidence,” she said. “We could have tried to resolve the issue. That is what our association is there for.”

Singh has not commented publicly on the substance of the dispute. His spokesperson issued a statement saying the actor had “consciously chosen to maintain silence, believing that professional discussions and personal equations are best handled with dignity, maturity and mutual respect,” and that his focus remained on his work and upcoming commitments. Variety reached out to Singh’s representatives at William Morris Endeavor and had not received a response by the time of going to press. Variety also contacted Excel Entertainment, who said: “At this time we reserve our right to comment as we remain committed to following due process and observing necessary protocols.”

Sources who spoke to Variety were careful to frame the dispute as symptomatic of a wider industry problem rather than an indictment of any individual. A producer who attended multiple sessions noted that Singh himself had raised the issue of stars being wronged by producers – citing cases where directors had committed to projects and then walked away, leaving actors without compensation for blocked schedules. The Producers Guild is understood to be working on broader guidelines around star commitment and producer accountability, with the “Don 3” case as a catalyst.

“A clear message has gone out to anyone intending to back out of a project after investment has been made that it’s not something that anyone is going to take lightly,” one senior producer who attended the sessions told Variety. “These are not decisions that should be taken lightly.” The same producer noted that ultimately no industry body has legal jurisdiction over the two parties. “This can only be a negotiated settlement or something that has to finally get decided in a court,” he said.

“I think at a larger level, we all want an ecosystem to flourish without any bans, limitations, regulations of the world,” another senior producer who attended the mediation sessions told Variety. “That’s not the path we want to choose. There should be a free business and free opportunity for everyone. But … we will have to join hands with each other and try to rectify that.”

As of press time, no resolution between Singh and Excel Entertainment had been reached and the dispute remained at a stalemate.